# Intake records ## NET-IN-0001 — Declaration requested: state this repository's layer in INTENT.md (security layer model §11) ```yaml id: NET-IN-0001 kind: intake title: 'Declaration requested: state this repository''s layer in INTENT.md (security layer model §11)' status: open origin: cross-repo origin_ref: net-kingdom security-layer-model_v0.4 §11 priority: low owner: net-kingdom requested_by: gate-house proposed_layer: Taxonomy description: 'A conformance sweep on 2026-08-28 found this repository has no layer declaration of its own. It carries a layering review note gate-house wrote into the top of its INTENT.md on 2026-08-24, and that note names a layer — but the words are gate-house''s, sitting above a line admitting the body is unadapted. Section 11 has since been amended to say so explicitly: a layer stated about a repository by another repository is not a declaration; only the repository''s own file, in its own voice, conforms. Seven of fifteen estate-authored repositories have declared; this is one of the eight that have not, and the standard does not claim adoption on the basis of notes gate-house wrote. REQUESTED: state the layer in INTENT.md in your own voice, or contest it. PROPOSED LAYER: Taxonomy. NetKingdom standards of record and publication. Note this repository publishes the layer model but has not declared its own place in it. Contesting is a real option and costs nothing — the three repositories that reviewed this model each returned a correction, two of which changed the standard. If the proposed layer is wrong for what this repository actually does, that is more useful to us than a label added to close a checkbox. Standard: net-kingdom/canon/standards/security-layer-model_v0.4.md.' created: '2026-08-28T21:01:51.894396Z' updated: '2026-08-28T21:01:51.894396Z' state_hub_intake_id: "01a06eb9-8b32-7f2a-aae5-0887b1083137" ``` ## NET-IN-0002 — Amend tenant-engine-boundary-contract_v0.1 for Engine/PIP, shipped guardrails, and PEP-shaped writes ```yaml id: NET-IN-0002 kind: intake title: 'Amend tenant-engine-boundary-contract_v0.1 for Engine/PIP, shipped guardrails, and PEP-shaped writes' status: open origin: cross-repo origin_ref: TEN-WP-0011-T06 priority: medium owner: net-kingdom requested_by: tenant-engine description: > tenant-engine has declared Engine / PIP under security-layer-model v0.7 (TEN-DEC-2026-001) and shipped guardrail/quota policy (TEN-WP-0006). canon/standards/tenant-engine-boundary-contract_v0.1.md still says guardrail/quota policy is "reserved, not yet implemented" and that tenant-engine is "not a policy enforcement point". Both sentences now mislead: guardrails are owned and served as PIP ceilings (tenant-engine/docs/tenant-guardrail-policy.md), and writes are PEP-shaped even though this repo is not a PDP. Requested amendments, without forking the contract into tenant-engine: 1. Mark guardrail/quota policy as owned and implemented; point at tenant-engine/docs/tenant-guardrail-policy.md. 2. Restate the authorization contract: data source / PIP for decisions; PEP-shaped for its own protected writes; never a second PDP. 3. Mention Engine / PIP and security-layer-model_v0.7 next to the existing IAM Profile / ADR-0013 / ADR-0014 references. Do not assign approval lifecycle to tenant-engine (TEN-DEC-2026-001 contested that placement). created: '2026-08-29' updated: '2026-08-29' state_hub_intake_id: "01a06eb9-c4af-7a9e-8ff5-1bc5f845eb38" ``` ## NET-IN-0003 — Demand-deferred workload-requested step-up interoperability ```yaml id: NET-IN-0003 kind: intake title: 'Demand-deferred workload-requested step-up interoperability' status: open flavor: residual origin: residual origin_ref: NK-WP-0042 priority: low owner: net-kingdom requested_by: net-kingdom created: '2026-10-10' updated: '2026-10-10' description: > Proposed IAM v0.4 carries the acr_values strength and max_age freshness contract, but no arbitrary-client workload-requested step-up integration has been accepted. The founder selected optional MFA on coulomb-social with no acr_values=aal2 switch-on (user-engine/docs/mfa-pilot-decision.md). Keep this demand-deferred: promote only for a named workload requirement and separately approved issuer/client policy. On promotion coordinate KeyCape enforcement, user-engine enrollment/recovery and workload/PDP assurance; prove no-factor refusal, enrollment return, stale AAL1 and provider unavailability with actual-user acceptance. Existing optional U05-U08 acceptance stays live in USER-WP-0027-T04 / USER-WP-0028-T03 and decision cef97ccd; it is not deferred by this intake. state_hub_intake_id: "01a12705-4400-7121-b326-1f63135bcab4" ``` ## NET-IN-0004 — Adopt and publish the bounded Staff-evidence successor source ```yaml id: NET-IN-0004 kind: intake title: 'Adopt and publish the bounded Staff-evidence successor source' status: open origin: cross-repo origin_ref: GH-WP-0004-T06 / GH-DEC-2026-025 priority: medium owner: net-kingdom requested_by: gate-house created: '2026-10-11' updated: '2026-10-11' description: > The confirmed founder disposition accepts the bounded doctrine proposal, not an entire successor standard. Proposed security-layer-model_v0.9.md assembles only its exact section3.4/4 candidate. Obtain exact successor source-owner/doctrine review and separate required whole-revision acceptance before acceptance annotations, operative companion/checker repointing or PolicyNexus owner publication. Retain acceptedv0.8 SHA3d829856 unchanged. Existing GH-WP-0004 holds GateHouse doctrine/checker responsibilities; this one owner intake retains source adoption/publication without a parallel plan. Source receipt completes GateHouse handoff, not standard adoption. INFD-IN-0007 waits for the accepted standard voice. Staff tension stays unresolved; per-event guarantees remain owed until source-owner class-specific reconciliation returns proof. Finished INFD-WP-0005/0007 remain historical receipts and must not be reopened solely from stale declarations. No deployment, credentials or runtime conformity is authorized here. state_hub_intake_id: "01a128ba-a62b-7887-a217-419a5958da8b" ```